gogopix
Subscriber
Well, the two needs I have are; body stabilization and video. They are also smaller than 5DII, yes?
The GetDPI Photography Forum
Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!
Next Gen Alpha FF DSLR
- Thread starter ptomsu
- Start date
douglasf13
New member
Ah, gotcha. I forgot about needing stabilization. The A900 is actually a little bigger than the 5Dii. The APS-C K7 is much smaller. Why not consider something like the EP-2? Small, movies, stabilization, and you can mount your R and M lenses.
Steen
Senior Subscriber Member
I wouldn't want to have to pay for video features.
And I don't want all kinds of video related buttons (how about zoom buttons
) and menu choices.
douglasf13
New member
Agreed. When you compare the 5Dii and the A900, which are the same cost, which features would you rather have? The best VF/higher sync speed/higher fps/better build/ faster AF or....video? Canon did very little to update the 5Dii from the 5D, outside of the new sensor and the video capability. I think before the 5Dii's release, most were hoping for a fullframe camera that is more similar to the current 7D, but, instead they got the 5D with 21mp and video.
Hank Graber
New member
Canon has not put video in it's top of the line studio camera but in the 5D. For phojournalists where media outlets want video and stills for web and print an integrated camera now makes sense. For some amatuer uses it does as well.
But the A900 is more a studio camera -great color and resolution at low ISO. I'm looking forward to an integrated capture device from RED, Sony or Canon but for the A900 successor I would agree Sony should continue down the same path as it set for the current A900. Don't sacrifice it's edge at what it does really well for high ISO or video. Don't mess with the excellent viewfinder either. Sony should put video in another model similar to the A900 like Canon did with the 5D to get the ball roling on their integrated capture device of the future.
The only Zeiss primes that would make me think about opening my wallet (aside from the current 135) are a PC/TS wide or a f/1.2 50mm.
But the A900 is more a studio camera -great color and resolution at low ISO. I'm looking forward to an integrated capture device from RED, Sony or Canon but for the A900 successor I would agree Sony should continue down the same path as it set for the current A900. Don't sacrifice it's edge at what it does really well for high ISO or video. Don't mess with the excellent viewfinder either. Sony should put video in another model similar to the A900 like Canon did with the 5D to get the ball roling on their integrated capture device of the future.
The only Zeiss primes that would make me think about opening my wallet (aside from the current 135) are a PC/TS wide or a f/1.2 50mm.
gogopix
Subscriber
Wow, is that true? I thought the A900 fell behind in bit depth and the resolution was fine, but some of the processing had the 'sony red' look?
Are pros really using this camera for studio? I'm thinking portrait and product espectially.
Not challenging, just curious. It is just that any comparisons I have seen of A900 to any MF or high end DSLR was lacking. I even saw (maybe a self serving ?
comment on the X1 having better files than the Sony.Victor
douglasf13
New member
Yeah, Victor, the A900 has become a very popular studio and landscape camera. There is no better 35mm camera in a controlled lighting environment, and while the D3x has a bit of a DR advantage in high DR scenes due to less shadow noise, the A900 has the color advantage. Any issue with reds that you've heard about were from poor profiling or processing, as color is one of the biggest IQ strenghts of the camera, outside of resolution. (C1's generic profile for the A900 is way too magenta, for example.)
Quentin_Bargate
Well-known member
Its a first class studio camera.
Interesting about reds, IDC produces drop dead perfect reds with wonderful tonality, to my eyes at least. Other RCs less so, in default mode anyway.
My use is landscape. I'd like a more refined shutter; a better, more user-friendly, less fragile, better placed cable release port; Live View; a full LCD histogram with channel selection, a RAW friendly histo display, and built-in UniWB option. Plus CZ wide primes, slow or fast, at least equivalent of the ZF/ZE ranges, but lighter like the CY range. We are never satisfied...
My use is landscape. I'd like a more refined shutter; a better, more user-friendly, less fragile, better placed cable release port; Live View; a full LCD histogram with channel selection, a RAW friendly histo display, and built-in UniWB option. Plus CZ wide primes, slow or fast, at least equivalent of the ZF/ZE ranges, but lighter like the CY range. We are never satisfied...
T
Theresa
Guest
And if you want video YOU can pay for it. Turn about is fair play.
Dave_Anderson
Member
Agreed... There is little room for extra buttons on the a900, which means something would likely have to go to implement video -- and I use all of the buttons!And if you want video YOU can pay for it. Turn about is fair play.
That's only the most obvious issue other than cost... I've seen it argued that other cameras add video with no downside to still imaging. Maybe, maybe not; was it a video-enabled Canon DSLR that had banding issues and ghost image issues(maybe that was two different models...)?
Besides, I already have a cheap crappy $250 HD cam, why would I want one in my DSLR as well? If I wanted to get serious about video I'd get a real video camera. Hopefully if Sony jumps on the crap-de-jour video bandwagon at the high end of the DSLR range they will not include it on every camera so we can really "choose not to use it".
douglasf13
New member
Video equipped sensors require more complex, faster read outs, which can lead to more heat/noise. Granted, the D3s and other cameras seem to be still very low noise. The 5Dii banding due to video is an interesting theory, Dave. It seems like it could be possible, but I don't know.
Dave_Anderson
Member
I wouldn't even call it a theory, just a question mark in my mind... e.g. do the banding/ghosting issues tend to be more common on cameras where some compromise has been made to enable video? May be little more than a first-generation growing pain, but IMHO the heat issues are of concern as well.
I'd like to try a test, say on an a550, where I take a pic in the conventional way, then using MF-Check LV for 10, 20, 30 sec take the same pic, then take a 3rd pic in the conventional way. I don't have the means to perform a 100% scientifically valid test but I think I can determine if there is a difference visible to the casual observer. It's way down the list though...
dhsimmonds
New member
A firmware upgade for the A900 is rumoured for February. We shall soon know now but I will only believe it when I see it!
T
Theresa
Guest
The Sony's, although just 12 bit, actual dynamic range and color depth are better than the 5D2 with its 14bit spec. I really don't want video, all I'd do is ignore it and have to pay for it. Better noise performance would be good. I'm afraid that video and live-view have become a "must have" because of marketing and reviews that focus on the number of features, useless to many or not. I think we will end up with EVFs too, even though a good pentaprism is more useful to me. The only EVF I have experience with is the KM DiMage a2 and a200 which have megapixel EVFs but are still greatly inferior. Perhaps someone will make one soon that is as clear, fast, and contrasty as a pentaprism, but I doubt it.